an M9 for the masses...well, not quite!

[Kim Coxon]

Not really. Leica are not trying and have never tried to cater for the mass market. It is like comparing the price of an M6 to a Canon AE1 20 years ago. Why should they try now? Does a pair of Armani jeans wear any better than Levi's or some of the budget ones. Leica has a niche market and has kept going because they know it and have avoided the "consumer" market. In reality, they don't even try for the pro market. The new summarits are not budget lenses, they are just less well specified than the Lux's and Cron's. They are still "Leica" quality.

Kim

Kim, the problem for Leica isn't the Nikon/Canon pro slrs. The problem for Leica is the Canon Xti's, which have better sensors with the same resolution and more advanced features than the M8 and cost 10 times less.

 

[Ray Kilby]

I sort of agree and also disagree with Kevin and fully share Sitemistic's view that the M8 is at the end of the trend.

Elaborating on those comments I will say that the M8 is a bit of a toy for many people and this was brought home to me while visiting a camera shop to take in my sick M8 for repair. A very nice gentleman with expensive tastes was buying a new lens for his very shiny MD. He had just jumped into photography and straight into the deep end and bought the MD and was using it on auto exposure exclusively and couldn't wok out why some shots were not working. It did make me feel a bit foolish and worry that the obsession with M's was a bit foolish and well, a bit daft. That said, I do earn money from my photography and I do use range finders as i find them the best for what I do when out and about and on the move. I love their simplicity. It's just focus aperture and speed (plus light temp with digital) And I get incredible results with them. (Technically speaking, not in regards talent!!). A shot of New York I recently took and blew up to a meter across as a limited edition print literally shocked me as to how good it was. The detail, the light and shade, it was on a part with a medium format or even dare I say a larger neg size. So although my M8 is a bit of a disappointment, the jury is still out. And there is a successful papperazzi I know of who is using M8's because her prefers them and has just ordered from Leica two more bodies.

So to say the M8 is just toys for the rich and foolish, if that was the inference , I have to disagree but also know where Kevin is coming from. Where Kevin is completely right is that all these new compacts of varying chip sizes, (And I agree that size is relative to be honest.) is where the 'new photography' is, and is more in keeping with the spirit of Mr Barnak, than any other cameras out there.

But this nagging feeling Mr Sitemistic that we are at the end of the line won't go away too.

 

[Ray Kilby]

I think that the RD1 was discontinued too soon, as this for me is, dare I say it, is sort of better in some respects to the M8. It's very, very simple to use. The dial is genius as at a glance you see the col temp, size, battery life and frames shot intsantly and somehow with the reversible viewer, you stop reviewing and just keep taking. And it's pretty frame accurate, robust, the battery lasts forever and easy. I wish it had a bigger pixel count, that's all.

 

[LCT]

Some of you are perhaps too young to recall it but the CL saved Leica at the time of the M5 debacle.
An affordable small APS-C DRF is exactly what most M users are dreaming about IMHO, i.e. those who buy mainly Zeiss, CV or second hand Leica lenses because new ones are too expensive for them.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Yes, yes, we know, Roger, that to you the Leica is a "luxury good" and it's worth selling off the family jewels or cashing in the 401k. But at some point, for people who WORK for a living, anyway, money is money. .

Dear Kevin,

Believe it or not, I do work for a living. My wife has a very small pension: enough to buy food, but nothing more, though fortunately (and by good planning) we own our house and have no significant debts.

This is however irrelevant to my argument.

How is Leica going to bring out a cheapie camera? Where are they supposed to save the money?

How do they do this without cheapening the Leica brand, thereby removing Leica's ability to charge premium prices for premium cameras?

Cheapie Leicas -- like cheapie Rolls Royces -- are the fantasy, not selling the family silver. Look what happened to Rover. At one time, there was a genuine possibility of Rover being the 'economy' version of Rolls Royce, for reasons that are clear to anyone who owned a P4 or P5. They didn't take that route and ended up with rebadged Austins. I suppose that the Leica name 'badge engineered' onto cheap Chinese cameras looks like a good idea to some people.

Assuming, of course, that the Celestial Empire survives the Olympics. I do not think that the Chinese have yet fully taken on board the fact that the Olympics have been inseparable from politics for decades, and that Spielberg is the tip of only one iceberg.

Cheers,

R.

 

[gebbos]

Ok . Perhaps a M9 with GPS for coordinates
Gerbern

 

[mr_phillip]

Some of you are perhaps too young to recall it but the CL saved Leica at the time of the M5 debacle.

That's one way of viewing it. Another would be to say that the CL came perilously close to killing the M line stone-dead. By having a low-cost camera manufactured by a third-party collaborator in an arrangement that saw Leitz receive very slim profits from each CL sold, Leitz succeeded only in cannibalizing sales away from the high-cost, high-profit M5 (the fact that the M5 was a radical departure from the previous Ms didn't help, but then so was the CL).

The CL was so commercially successful, and yet so financially costly to Leitz, that they had no choice but to terminate both it, and the manufacturing agreement with Minolta, prematurely.

 

[Toby]

But the M8 is not competing in a world of metal, mechanical cameras, where detailed hand machining and assembly produce a superior product. They are competing in a world where Canon can churn out Xti's by the hundreds of thousands for $500 a pop, and still produce photos indistinquishable, by almost everyone from a $5,000 digital Leica.

At my local camera shop they sat they only make approximately £5 on every 400d or Rebel that they sell. Leica would have to shift huge numbers of their cameras to compete in this kind of market. They don't have the distribution network, manufacturing capability, or marketing budget to build and sell a mass market or even a bigger niche market camera than the M8 at Solms. (The panasonic connection is another story).

If they tried to market an RF with a wider market appeal they may end up being scuppered by the initial demand for it and lose money. I think to be honest if I were them and I wanted to increase my income I'd make Canon or Nikon fit lenses, a lot of R users are using R Glass with adapters so why not concentrate on what they are good at (making excellent prime lenses) and forget about killing themselves to compete in the digital market.

 

[georgef]

hmmm...great point all around from everyone, but I think two thinks were missed here as the thread progressed:

I did not, originally (and I apologize if it seemed so) talked about a "cheapie" LEICA, but a more budget concious body. By the way, having tried both the GX100 and the GRDI, they are not even close to the level of the M8 or the RD-1 for that matter; they are P&S! Dont confuse them with an M-system body!

The other, and I think most important point, that was missed by most except maybe the mention of the fading trend post, is who that camera should market TO: the younger, 20s to 30s photographers who will carry the company into the next 50 years. I am sure if a poll was set (and it may already have been) in this forum about the average age of this group, it would be in the higher ages, and that reflects the main LEICA customer base! But these are people who will buy into this compay for more than its photographic virtues. And they will not be buying after the next decade or so!

In order for the company to survive the next 50 years, it HAS to create a new customer base! LEICA can make the absolute best camera body possible, and for it, make the absolute best lenses possible...and for the price it will go bankrupt!
Cadillac went though the exact same exercise a while ago, tried several "cheapie" models, then decided the best way for them to attract the new cadillac buyers, the younger crowd, was to design a new sexy line! It suceeded for the most part.

LEICA, IMHO, should follow the example and reach out to the new CAPAs, Henri Cartiers etc. with a product one does not have to already be succesful to own!

...and to quote someone's very smart previous post:"...flame suit on!..."

 

[kevin m]

How is Leica going to bring out a cheapie camera? Where are they supposed to save the money?

First of all, I didn't mean to imply that you don't work for a living. I've read your columns in Shutterbug so I know that's not true. 🙂 I'm just griping that Leica has ceased to be a tool used by professionals, by and large, and become a 'lifestyle accessory.' Something that wasn't true in the film days. I know there are exceptions, but not enough to keep Leica relevant, frankly. Since you brought up Rolls Royce, I'd say the comparison is apt. It's been decades since a Rolls could "do" something better than any decent proletariatwagen. All they have going for them now is build quality (which is lovely) and snobbery. I can afford this, you can't.

I'd much prefer if Leica followed the example of another low-volume manufacturer and imitated Porsche. They compete. They're a dominant force in racing. Porsche makes 'economy' models and does quite well. No one thinks the Boxster ruins the value of their 911 Turbo, do they?

So to answer your question, I don't know. But I don't think it's necessary to go off the deep end and imagine that anything less than the best means Chinese-made Leicas.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I did not, originally (and I apologize if it seemed so) talked about a "cheapie" LEICA, but a more budget concious body.

Dear George,

Doesn't alter the question: where/how are they going to cut costs?

Cheers,

Roger

 

[Toby]

Dear George,

Doesn't alter the question: where/how are they going to cut costs?

Cheers,

Roger

The expensive part of an M camera is the rangefinder. If it was me I'd look to develop a modern replacement for this, like a electronic focus confirmation system in a non-rf viewfinder.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I'd much prefer if Leica followed the example of another low-volume manufacturer and imitated Porsche. They compete. They're a dominant force in racing. Porsche makes 'economy' models and does quite well. No one thinks the Boxster ruins the value of their 911 Turbo, do they?

Dear Kevin,

How can they 'compete'? You don't get camera races. I know that sounds flip, but the only thing you can do with cameras is take pictures.

Second. an M-series is a pretty simple, basic piece of machinery: much closer to a Boxster than a 911 Turbo. Indeed, closer to the (still more basic) 356 than either, though mercifully less prone to corrosion than a 356.

Besides, compare the price and usefulness of Porsche's 'economy' Boxster with a Eurobox or (in the USA) a Japanese import, and it's still not what you'd call a family runabout.

So I hope you'll forgive me if I simply repeat my question: where are they going to save the money on an 'economy' model?

Cheers,

Roger

 

[kevin m]

...having tried both the GX100 and the GRDI, they are not even close to the level of the M8 or the RD-1 for that matter; they are P&S! Dont confuse them with an M-system body!

Thank God they're not competing with the M8 or even the R-D1. They're not designed to appeal to one's appreciation of "the finer things in life" they're just small sensor digital cameras with manual controls via mechanical interface. And they're better at Leica's traditional strong suit (small, discreet camera) than Leica is now, frankly. Just like the original Barnack Leica, their image quality is good enough for the task at hand, and their small size means that no one takes them seriously, which seems to be a key in photographing people in their element.

Leica is missing a golden opportunity here. Keep making the M8, and don't make a 'budget' M, if they think it'll spoil their 'image,' but they need to recognize that the cameras derided as "point and shoots" are the inheritors of the 35mm legacy of small cameras with reasonable image quality, and the market is wide open for a really functional, manual control camera.

 

[Roger Hicks]

The expensive part of an M camera is the rangefinder. If it was me I'd look to develop a modern replacement for this, like a electronic focus confirmation system in a non-rf viewfinder.

Dear Toby,

Attractive at first sight, but how? Presumably a 'go/no go' indicator, a bit like the meter. The shutter would need to be completely electronic, i.e. no mechanical open/close, just sensor capture vs. sensor to feed finder.

Apart from adding read-outs to the viewfinder, and thereby cluttering it up, this does sound like the best suggestion I've ever heard for a low-cost, M-fit body. Even so, given the extra $1000 that the digi sensor adds to an MP, it's still going to be an expensive camera.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[kevin m]

How can they 'compete'? You don't get camera races. I know that sounds flip, but the only thing you can do with cameras is take pictures.

Keep making the M8, but make it a 'no excuses' tool. Dual memory card slots. ISO via dial and not menu. Weather-sealed. Self-cleaning sensor. Better high iso performance. Fix the banding problem once and for all. Fix at least four of those issues, and it would be worth $5,000 to me. Then I could put it in my bag and shoot a wedding the way I like with the lenses I love without having to keep a Canon as a back-up.

Within its performance limits, I never worried about my M6TTL; it was as good a camera as my EOS-3 from a functional standpoint. But I don't think you can say the same about the M8 relative to, say, a Canon 5D. In fact, of the wedding photographers I know who use an M8, not ONE of them uses it solo. That is a real problem for Leica.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Keep making the M8, but make it a 'no excuses' tool. Dual memory card slots. ISO via dial and not menu...

Um... that's not saving money. That's making it even more expensive. Sorry I misunderstood you before.

There are severe space constraints: that's why the baseplate goes on 'backwards' and there's no PC flash nipple. Dual card slots are not currently feasible.

There are however some interesting accessories under consideration.

Cheers,

R.

 

[kevin m]

Um... that's not saving money. That's making it even more expensive.

You also asked how they could "compete" and I gave my answer.

As to how they could make a cheaper M, as I said before, a camera similar to the R-D1 with it's smaller rangefinder would be fine. Any decent sensor in the 8-10MP range would work, too. An M mount, and manual controls, brother! 😀

You seem to be satisfied with the current situation, Roger, with the M8 as an interesting digital rangefinder with limited practical use. The demographics of Leica's customer base show that to be a strategy that's literally dying off.

 

[Ben Z]

Maybe I have it wrong but I was under the impression the only reason cameras have dual card slots is because a lot of pros have tons of CF cards, but eventually everything is going in the direction of SD because of the problems of bent pins with CF's. Or were you referring to having two SD slots for double the memory?

 

[nightfly]

Jumping in late but Leica has basically become irrelevant. They make a boutique interchangeable lens camera for rich enthusiasts and put their name on me too consumer digicams.

If they want relevance again they would have to make a camera that was better than the high end Canon's and Nikon's at doing what it does. If that means a weather sealed, manually controlled, M9 for $5000 great. People could swallow the price if it were the best. From what I understand, the current M8 isn't.

The other thing would be to develop a small camera based on the Panasonic platform that offered some more intuitive control than the digicams out there. Basically a digital Barnack. Maybe it's a fixed lens GRD style but with dedicated manual controls for everything (like the G9 ISO dial). As much as people love the Ricohs, you can't tell anything about how the camera is set by looking at it with the screen off. Make a fixed lens digital with a genuine aperture control, shutter control and ISO dial with RAW and no noise reduction jpegs and you'd have a winner. Price at a premium but not more than double a standard digicam. Stick a 35mm equivalent Summicron speed lens on it to differentiate it from the Ricoh and the Sigma. Throw in a viewfinder like the Cosina Mini Finder in addition to the LCD so you can use it, screen off with every control available to you. It would be revolutionary.